Login
It's fall 2003 at a dorm in Harvard University, and Mark (Jesse Eisenberg) is sitting in front of his computer. Back then (jeez, I say "back then" as if 2003 was a long time ago), one of the more popular blogging sites was livejournal.com (I still remember people asking me to "read their LJ"). Mark happens to have an LJ, and his blog is called Zuck-on-it (because his last name is Zuckerberg, in case you didn't know). After having argued and broken up with the girl he was dating, he has a few beers and posts some incredibly mean-spirited stuff about her on the blog, but with all the alcohol and anger, that doesn't seem to be enough. So, in an apparent attempt to get back at ALL GIRLS, he gets help from his friend Eduardo (Andrew Garfield), whom he affectionately calls "Wardo," to create a "hot-or-not" style website in which people compare girls based on attractiveness; as it turns out, the site gets so many hits that it crashes Harvard's server. This catches the attention of Divya (Max Minghella) and the Winklevoss twins (both played by Armie Hammer), who pitch an idea to Mark about making a social networking site in which people can look up their friends. Mark accepts, but soon becomes evasive, never responding to any calls or messages from Divya and the twins. Turns out that Mark decides to go about making a social networking site of his own (with Eduardo's help), and leaves the other three guys out of it. Divya and the twins file a lawsuit claiming damages and intellectual property theft. The film shifts back and forth in time, going from the scenes that depict Mark and Eduardo's joint collaboration in creating Facebook to the scenes in which depositions are being held for the lawsuit. Things get severely complicated with Mark and Eduardo's friendship and business partnership upon the arrival of Napster creator Sean (Justin Timberlake), who has certain ideas about how to go about this venture, and one of them is to exclude Eduardo from it.
What I find ironic is that many people will view the character of Mark as a socially awkward weirdo that they can't relate to. My question to people is this: are you sure that you can't relate to him? Mark comes across as incredibly intelligent, yet it very quickly becomes evident that it's impossible to have a substantial conversation with him. He'll say two things at once, answer what's convenient for him, put a spin on heated conversations so that they're stabilized, yet none of it has the slightest bit of honesty to it. This is an incisive criticism of the way in which a society that is addicted to communication through written text rather than face-to-face interaction has become socially retarded, largely incapable of conveying feelings of any sort. It's the worst kind of regression, and THE SOCIAL NETWORK has no problem telling us just how severe the regression has been. Eduardo, on the other hand, is a sign of hope. Sure, his concern throughout the film is largely about getting "left out financially," but at the core of this, we can tell how morally conflicted he is about particular things and how worried he is about losing Mark as a friend. This becomes incredibly clear during one of the depositions, during which we initially think that Mark is being responsible taking notes, but we soon discover that he was just doodling; Eduardo, on the other hand, feels compelled to leave the room at one point because he simply can't handle the situation anymore. Eduardo is the film's emotional epicenter, while Mark is the "caution" sign that those of us watching the film should heed. At one point, Eduardo tells Mark, "Please, if there's something wrong, I want you to tell me." But Mark can't say anything, because he has no idea how to answer. He probably doesn't even understand what "Wardo" is saying. He's a computer genius but an emotional ignorant.
Of course, it's not all a dreary film. In fact, THE SOCIAL NETWORK often reaches the apex of wit. When Mark meets up with Eduardo at a Caribbean-themed party, Mark can't mentally handle the fact that there is a picture of Niagara Falls at a party that has said theme. Mark then takes Eduardo outside to talk about ideas for the website they're working on, and because Mark is so engrossed talking about this, he's entirely unphased by the cold, while a freezing Eduardo tries to listen to him. This is way too good, and deserves to be quoted:
EDUARDO - My knees are shaking.
MARK - Yeah, I know, I'm totally psyched, too.
Another laugh-out-loud moment that you may miss if you don't pay attention comes when Mark is talking about the Winklevoss twins and refers to them using the made-up plural "Winklevi" (which I'll continue to use in this review, for brevity's sake). Mark speaks at 100 miles an hour, and it'll be tough to catch all the brilliant lines he delivers, but well, that's why I'll surely be watching THE SOCIAL NETWORK again soon. There's a brilliantly hilarious sequence in which the Winklevi go to the office of Harvard's president. The administrative atmosphere of the university scene is captured PERFECTLY here, and there are oodles of dead-on acerbic humor from the actor playing the president. The banter from the Winklevi as they make their plea to him (with one being more respectful and the other more forceful) is nothing short of masterful screenwriting.
One of the many truly great aspects of THE SOCIAL NETWORK stems from what Eduardo calls the "Sean-a-thon" - the manner in which the filmmakers weave the character of Sean into the moral heart of the story is ingenious. There's a scene in particular that feels reminiscent of that moment in EYES WIDE SHUT during which Nick Nightingale is sitting at a table in a bar with Bill and indirectly, hesitatingly tempts Bill to get the address for the mysterious house that Nick will be heading to that night. The scene in THE SOCIAL NETWORK takes place when Mark and Sean are sitting at a club, and Sean is convincing him to go much further than Mark would've ever dreamed of. The club's red lights are on Sean as he speaks. There's been a lot of talk about the real Mark Zuckerberg's feelings on how he's been portrayed in the film, but what I'm MORE interested in is how the inventor of Napster feels about being portrayed as Lucifer in this movie.
Over the course of the last half hour of the film is when the sharpest arrows are aimed at today's "Facebook generation" (or however you want to call it). A couple breaks up when one of the two people gets upset over someone's relationship status, and um, the break-up nearly causes an apartment to burn down. Later on, the irony is simply too good when several teenagers all claim to be 21 when faced by a cop (they would've known better if they had watched SUPERBAD), and anyone who thinks this sort of thing doesn't happen in real life is seriously blind. But the thing that got to me on the most surreal level is what happens during the final seconds of THE SOCIAL NETWORK. Someone "does" something on Facebook, and then keeps doing it over and over again. It's something I've seen happen in real life before, and it's also the kind of thing that a lot of people do, despite never admitting to it. Communication has become too impersonal for people to admit things like that, as we learn during the film.
Because the film strives so much to accurately capture the generation it's portraying, there are times at which I admit its pace is a little bit too frenetic for me. During its first hour, THE SOCIAL NETWORK does a lot of explaining, most of it having to do with either Internet codes or business-related finances, both subjects I know very little about, and the fact that most of the explanation is done by the fast-talking Mark can be a little bit jarring. It's the type of material that'll be eaten up by people who are computer whizzes or finance experts (and those who are both will probably have an orgasm over it), but the rest of us may stare blankly every once in a while. The other quibble I have with the film is the fact that the depiction of the Winklevi is too much like that of stereotypical, snobby European kids. These two characters aren't given the depth that is given to others. There's also a somewhat strangely choreographed sequence in which they lose a rowing competition, and while it's meant to establish a parallelism to their losing battle against Mark, I didn't feel it came across as effectively as it was intended.
The acting in this film is of the highest caliber. Normally, I just write one paragraph to talk about performances, but an exception is warranted here. I thought that I would have to continue arguing with people about the fact that Jesse Eisenberg is a fantastic actor who does NOT play the same characters as Michael Cera (nor does he even physically look like him, aside from being white and skinny), but I think that after THE SOCIAL NETWORK, I won't have to keep doing it anymore. Here's an actor who's already given terrific performances before in unpopular films like ROGER DODGER, THE SQUID AND THE WHALE and last year's grossly underrated ADVENTURELAND. Now he even has a chance to get Oscar recognition for his uncanny ability to portray awkwardness and neurosis so perfectly. His rendition of Mark Zuckerberg is sheer brilliance.
Andrew Garfield is even more unheard of than Eisenberg, and it bothers me that the only role people seem to know him from is one we haven't even seen yet (he's been cast as Spider-Man in that franchise's new reboot). For those wondering "who IS this guy, and WHY was he picked to be Spider-Man?", I recommend that you rent the film BOY A immediately. The movie is fantastic and proof that Garfield is an astonishing actor. Then again, you can also notice that from his devastating performance in THE SOCIAL NETWORK. Garfield benefits a lot from the fact that he's got the film's most emotionally meaty role, but his work with said role deserves an unequivocal A+. The scene in which he breaks down and calls Mark out on ruining their friendship is simply heart-breaking.
While people think of Justin Timberlake as the opposite of an "unknown" performer, the argument can be made that he IS one, at least in the realm of acting. Many may be surprised by the strength of his work in this movie, but that's because a lot of them won't have seen his equally great performances in ALPHA DOG and BLACK SNAKE MOAN (his work in the former film is particularly fantastic). His performance as the diabolical Sean is a delight to watch.
Referring to THE SOCIAL NETWORK as "the Facebook movie" or "the movie about Facebook" is not just an insult to this brilliantly timely piece of cinema, but it's also a substantially wrong description. Calling it "the Facebook movie" makes it seem as though the film is about things that are of interest to the tons of people who are obsessed with said website, when in fact, this film is about things that most Facebook-obsessed folks are (unfortunately) not interested in: true friendship and scathing betrayal. It's the kind of friendship that has nothing to do with clicking an "Accept" button and it's the kind of betrayal that has nothing to do with "de-friending" someone. THE SOCIAL NETWORK realizes that this Facebook-dependent society is becoming abominably impersonal and socially awkward, and it has no trouble transmitting that message in an incredibly effective way throughout its running time. It is a savagely critical and startlingly relevant work of cinema, and a truly impressive and heart-wrenching one at that.
8/10
